Mumbai Court June 1989 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Steel Industries of India and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-20-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)LC77(Bombay)
Bharucha, J.1. This petition concerns the import of 72 consignments of audio magnetic tapes wound on hubs. Subsequent to their import the petitioners cut the said tapes to the requisite lengths, wound them onto spools and sold them as audio cassettes.2. The principal question that arises in the petition is in regard to the particular entry in the Customs tariff under which the said tapes are liable to Customs duty. It was the case of the Customs authorities that they fell within heading 92 01/13 of the Customs Tariff Act and were liable to 100% rate of duty. This entry reads thus:Musical instrument including electronic and similar musical instruments; sound recorders and reproducers; decoy calls and sound signalling instruments; television image and sound recorders and reproducers, parts and accessories of the above articles.'Mr. Bulchandani, learned Counsel for the respondents, submitted that the said tapes were parts or accessories of the articles mentioned in the heading. He submitt...
Asian Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC179Tri(Mum.)bai
1. For hearing the applicants' appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,60,78,525.84/-.2. Shri Seervai, the learned senior advocate, on behalf of the applicants stated that during the period from 1978-83 covered by the demand, they were paying duty declared on the basis of the manufacturing cost plus manufacturing profit as per the verdict of the various High Courts. The assessments were provisional during the material periods. Subsequently, on the pronouncement of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bombay Tyre International, proceedings were initiated for finalisation of the provisional assessments. The initial order passed by the Asstt. Collector was set aside by the Collector (Appeals) who remanded the matter for de novo consideration, whereupon the Asstt. Collector issued a notice for de novo adjudication on 6-4-1984 and by his order dated 15-10-1984, the Asstt. Collector allowed 7 items of deductions as admissible discounts but disallowe...
Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. R.A. Bidoo and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)BomCR367; (1989)91BOMLR219; [1989(59)FLR441]; (1990)ILLJ98Bom
Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India raises a question relating to the interpretation of the work 'employee' to be found in Section 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act. The circumstances in which this question arises ought to be stated.2. The first respondent, hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent', joined the petitioner company, hereinafter referred to as 'the company', as a Camera Operator on 1st of October 1968. The respondent was promoted to the post of Departmental Assistant and ten years later in the year 1978 he was further promoted to the post of Junior Assistant Master. Above him, there are two more posts, namely those of Senior Master and Engraving Master. Thus the respondent occupied a middle position in the hierarchy in this department which is called the Screen Making Department. On 28th of January 1982. His services were terminated with immediate effect on tendering him salary for one month in lieu of notice....
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Chimajirao Kanhojirao Shirke and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: 1992ACJ452
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The appellant insurance company is the original defendant. The respondents are the original plaintiffs. They are the parents of the deceased Mahindra Shirke, an educated young boy, aged 22 years in the year 1980 when the accident took place. The said Mahindra had obtained loan from the Maharashtra Finance Corporation and Bank of Baroda under the Educated Unemployment Scheme for purchasing a goods truck in the year 1977 and actually purchased the truck bearing No. MHL 7170. The documents were naturally executed in favour of the Bank of Baroda, Kolhapur. It was said to be the condition precedent under the scheme that the goods truck should be driven by the owner himself. The said Mahindra had a driving licence for heavy vehicles and was stated to be in fact driving the truck ever since the truck was purchased. The truck was insured under the Commercial Vehicles Comprehensive Policy with the appellant insurance company. The risk of personal injury and property damage was ...
Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs. Chimajirao Kanhojirao Shirke and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1989
Reported in: I(1993)ACC128
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The appellant insurance company is the original defendent. The respondents are the original plantiffs. They are the parents of the deceased Mahindra Shirke, and educated young boy, aged 22 years in the year 1980 when the accident took place. The said Mahindra had obtained loan from the Maharashtra Finance Corporation and Bank of Baroda under the Educated Unemployment Scheme for purchasing a goods truck in the year 1977 and actually purchased the truck bearing No. MHL 7170. The documents were naturally executed in favour of the Bank of Baroda, Kolhapur. It was said to be the condition precedent under the scheme that the goods truck should be driven by the owner himself. The said Mahindra had a driving licence for heavy vehicles and was stated to be in fact driving the truck ever since the truck was purchased. The truck was insured under the Commercial. Vehicles Comprehensive Policy with the appellant Insurance Company. The risk of personal injury and property damage was...
Atmaram Son of Wasaram Chavan and ors. Vs. Maharashtra State Electrici ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-16-1989
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR429
H.W. Dhable, J.1. The petitioners in this writ petition claim assignment of proper seniority in the post of Chargeman Grade II and consequent deemed dates of promotions and seniority in the higher posts of the Chargeman Grade I, the Assistant Shift Engineer and the Assistant Superintendent on the dates when the respondents 2 to 5 who, according to them, were junior to them in the post of the Chargeman Grade II were promoted to the said higher posts.2. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioners, while working as sub Engineers in the Nagpur Urban Circle of the respondent No. 1 Electricity Board, were appointed as Chargeman Grade-II on purely temporary basis for a period not exceeding three months with effect from 1-1-1976 so far as the petitioners 1,2,4 and 6 are concerned, with effect from 22-1-1976 in the case of the petitioner No. 3, with effect from 10-2-1976, in the case of petitioner No. 5 with effect from 17-1-1976, in the case of the petitioner No. 7 and with effect from 10-1-19...
Mrs. Rehana Abdulla Vs. K.L. Verma and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ336
Desai, J.1. In this writ petition there is no return. However, in the instant matter the primary irresponsibility is that of the Joint Secretary, Government of India to whom, we are told, draft return was sent as far back as April, 1989 but who has thereafter not cared to respond. However, it must be said to his credit that proper reminders do not appear to have been sent to him nor has he been apprised that it is necessary in this matter to act promptly since Rule was granted as far back as January, 1989 the returnable date was fixed at 3rd April, 1989. We do not understand how a draft affidavit could be got ready only after the returnable date. This indicates the casual manner in which the the Respondents work. For nearly two months no reminder has been sent for expediting the return. Thus there is casualness on part of all concerned but in the instant case principally on part of those concerned with the passing of the detention order at Delhi. It is clear that they are not able to c...
Shekhar Shantaram Pawaskar Vs. V.K. Saraf and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ138
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. This petition seeks to impugn the detention order dated the 2nd of January, 1989 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. This order of detention has been challenged by Shri Thakare, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on various grounds. However, it is sufficient to mention only one of the grounds since the same goes to the root of the matter entitling the release of the petitioner from detention. According to Shri Thakare, the petitioners had not been furnished with the grounds of detention and the full and accurate material in support thereof. This had materially affected his right to make an effective representation. He pointed out that amongst the documents furnished to the detenu was a Medical Certificate dated the 26th of October, 1988 in respect of the injuries sustained by one Sidram M. Guram. The original of this certificate is in English. The petitioner was also furnis...
Suresh Ramji Chauhan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(24)LC236(Bombay); 1989(43)ELT240(Bom)
1. Despite a very valiant effort on the part of Mr. Gupte appearing for the Customs, I think, I will have to allow this petition, as, in my view, there is no material whatsoever to frame any charge as against the petitioner.2. The petitioner along with Respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and one Fakruddin Sarafally Ampanwala were charged for the offences punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 135(1)(a)(ii) and Section 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The said Fakruddin became an approver and his statement has been recorded.3. The petitioner is a partner of a firm by name Messrs Ramji Jaisingh & Co., engaged in the business of clearing and forwarding work within the jurisdiction of the Bombay Customs for the last several years. The case has been pending since about 1978. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions in the year 1982 and as of today, the case has not made any progress and no ...
Krislon Texturiser Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(25)LC179(Bombay); 1989(44)ELT448(Bom)
1. The petitioners imported partially oriented yarn (POY) of 115 deniers. Countervailing duty (CVD) thereon was regulated by the provisions of Item 18 II(i)(a) of the Central Excise Tariff. An Excise exemption notification dated 11th May 1982 related to such POY. Thereunder man-made fibres and yarn other than textured and polyester yarn of 100 deniers and above but not above 750 deniers was liable to excise duty at the rate of Rs. 61.25 per kg. This, in the petitioners' submission, was the rate of CVD that ought to have been imposed upon the POY imported by them. What was in fact imposed was the rate of Rs. 78.75 per kg. provided in the said notification for polyester yarn of 75 deniers and above but below 100 deniers. The petitioners' contention is that the texturising process which the POY imported by them underwent subsequent to the import to produce texturised yarn of 75 deniers was a separate excisable event; that this was a separate excisable event was recognised by the Excise au...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »